This is the first part of my essay on the Hypostatic Union. My plan was to have it done by today, but the Lord had other plans. This is the first of three sections of the essay, and the focus here is upon the Son before His incarnation. I hope you enjoy, and are influenced to delve further into the marvelous person and work of our Lord, Jesus Christ! -------------------------------------------------------------- The Hypostatic Union A.M. Stock “Though He was in the form of God, He did not count equality with God a thing to be held on to, but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a slave, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even the death of the Cross. Therefore God has highly exalted Him and granted Him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:6-11) It’s Christmas time, and those who aren’t relentlessly consumed by consumerism or opposing the pagan influences with a ferocity matching the Sabbath-savoring Pharisees, are thinking about the incarnation of our Lord. Though the Bible doesn’t put much emphasis on the details of the Incarnation, it is an important aspect of redemptive history, and a necessary precondition for the atonement. My hope is that this essay will be accessible to any believer, so I tried to keep the main essay simple, while adding lengthy footnotes for those interested in more academic studies. Either way, the Son of God taking on flesh is a miracle we cannot begin to comprehend, and one for which we should be forever thankful for. THE SON BEFORE THE INCARNATION It is perhaps most fitting to start not only in the beginning, but before the beginning. John’s Gospel opens with these famous words: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The word for “was” here is an imperfect-active form, which indicates that in the beginning, the Word already was. As my own pastor, Bryan Hurlbutt, put it, “The Word was was-ing.” This is also affirmed in Philippians 2:6, which says that Christ “was in the form of God”. The word for “was” here is slightly different, but affirms the same truth. This word, υπαρχων, appears most often in the New Testament in reference to possessions. It could be appropriate to translate the verse: “He possessed the form of God.” He owns deity, because He is deity. Other verses affirm that the Son possesses aseity (self-existence), which is not only an attribute of God, but also His very name [1]. Jesus claims, “Before Abraham was, I AM”, bringing to mind God’s response from the burning bush in Exodus 3:14. Likewise, Revelation says that God is the “Alpha and Omega, who was and is and is to come” (Revelation 1:8; 4:8), but at the end of the book, these same words are applied to the coming Jesus (Revelation 22:13). [2] Both of these sets of verses show that Jesus always was, continues to be, and always will be. He IS the necessary first cause, the philosopher’s “unmoved mover”. This is why Jesus can say in John 17:5, “Father, glorify Me in Your own presence with the glory that I had with You before the world existed.” He had been eternally with the Father, “in His bosom” (John 1:18). Though John 17, which theologians have described as “the Holy of holies” gives us a glimpse of this eternal and intimate relationship, there is still much mystery. What we do know is that there was delighting and rejoicing (Proverbs 8:30), and that Jesus longed to return to the fullness of this heavenly fellowship (Matthew 17:17). At this point, it seems wise to clarify that the fact that His existence was WITH the Father distinguishes Him from the Father. John 1:18 calls Jesus “μονογενης θεος”, which means “only God” [3], affirming His full deity, but He is also said to be “in the bosom of the Father” (who is elsewhere called “the only true God”, meaning there is a distinction. Both are affirmed as being truly God, and both are eternal, and both have eternally existed in a Father and Son relationship. This is important to point out because it would be false to say that the Father took on flesh. [4] Given that our existence is restricted to time, we can scarcely understand the Trinitarian relationship that existed before the creation of time (“before time” itself is a concept we cannot comprehend [5]). Even with God’s revelation to us can’t allow for exhaustive understanding, given His infinity and our limitations. The analogy of trying to explain calculus to a newborn falls short as an example of God trying to explain eternity to temporal creatures. Still, what is beyond dispute is that the Son is God, and has always existed as the Son. But if some are still not fully convinced that Jesus is “very God of very God” (Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.), His role in creation, which distinguishes Him from all things created, should make it evident. Colossians 1:16 tells us, “For by Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through Him and for Him.” If that verse wasn’t clear enough, we are also specifically told, “All things were made through Him, and without Him was NOT EVEN ONE [6] thing made that was made.” (John 1:3) He is not only credited with the initial creation of all things, but the ongoing maintaining of these things as well: “He sustains all things by the word of His power” (Hebrews 1:3), and “in Him all things hold together” (Colossians 1:17). Christ is most often described as the one THROUGH whom all things were made. I like to joke that δια is a Greek nickname for Christ because the word is used so often to speak of His role in creation, redemption, adoption, prayer, etc. Creation is a Trinitarian work, and the Son’s role is to be the agent through whom the Father creates all things. As Romans 11:36 says of God, “From Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be glory forever.” 1 Corinthians 8:6 takes this formula and shows that it applies to both the Father and the Son: “There is one God [7], the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we exist.” [8] Even time itself is said to be a created through the Son. Typical translations of Hebrews 11:3 read: “the universe/world was created by the word of God”. I would translate the word for “universe/world” as “ages” or “time”. The word here is not κοσμος, the typical word for the world system, but it is “αιωνας”. The word group can be translated in two primary ways, either “age/ages” or “forever/eternal”. Either way, it’s clear that both of these possibilities are related to time. We just read that the “word of God” created the ages, which brings makes the intuitive mind think of John 1.[9] But we need not speculate about whether or not there is a connection. Earlier in this very book we have the same words being used in a slightly different framework: “…His Son…through whom He created the αιωνας... He upholds all things by the word of His power.” Here you have it plainly stated that even time was created through the Son, meaning His being is beyond time. He never began. [10] The Son’s pre-incarnation is not limited to creating and sustaining of the world. He makes frequent appearances before His incarnation. In fact, I would argue that whenever anyone interacted with God in the Old Testament, they were interacting with the Son. We are told that God is invisible (1 Timothy 1:17), and that the Son is “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:5). With that in mind, consider John 1:18 again: “No one has ever seen God…” This would agree with what we have just seen. God is invisible, and no one has seen Him. So who did the Old Testament saints talk to? “…the only God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has made Him known.” It is the Son who makes God known, and it is the Son through whom the Father speaks. Christ is called the “Word of God”. This phrase did not originate with the New Testament, but is found all throughout the Old Testament. Just as John 1 describes Jesus as the Word who makes God known, the “Word of the LORD” would come to prophets and tell them what they are to say. This “word” would often be personified (Jeremiah 1:9, Ezekiel 1:3, 1:28), and with similar feel to John 1:1 and 1:18, the Word seems to be God Himself, yet speaks for God. But so as not to be overly presumptuous in our conclusions, we will examine plain Scriptural examples of the Son in the Old Testament. The first, we have already touched on. Jesus says in John 8:58, “before Abraham was, I AM.” Those listening picked up stones to kill Him because they understood His claim: He was the I AM that spoke to Moses in the burning bush. This ties into our next example: Jesus and the Israelites in the wilderness. Paul says that the Israelites “all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them and the Rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:3-4) Christ was with them in the wilderness. We have a similar testimony found in Hebrews: “By faith Moses… refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter… He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt.” (Hebrews 11:24-26) [11] Moses looked to the Son, as did Abraham (John 8:56), and wrote about Him (John 5:46). This is how Exodus 33 can tell us Moses spoke “face-to-face” with Moses (verse 11), and on the same page have God say, “you cannot see My face, for man shall not see Me and live” (verse 20). This is how Abraham can invite the LORD into His home (Genesis 18). This is how Jacob can wrestle with God and live (Genesis 32:30). This is how the invisible (Genesis 3:8) God can walk around the Garden of Eden. This is why Joshua bowed before the figure that recited the same words as the burning bush (Joshua 5:13-15). The implications of John 1:18 are far reaching indeed. I don’t think, given what we have seen, that it is inaccurate to say that no one directly encountered God the Father in the Old Testament (John 1:18), and when an encounter isn’t qualified by “the Spirit of the Lord”, or an angel, they were encountering God by way of His Son. The final example I’ll give is my favorite. John 12:40 quotes a section from Isaiah 6, followed by “Isaiah said these things because he saw His glory and spoke of Him.” [12] John is referencing vision had in the temple: “I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above Him stood the seraphim… and one called to another and said: ‘Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory!” Given what John said, who is this glorious, “holy, holy, holy” one that had angels covering their eyes and Isaiah covering his mouth? It is the Son of God. There is one final aspect of the Son’s pre-incarnate activity we will look at, what theologians call the “Covenant of Redemption.” If you read through the Gospel of John, one thing that will probably jump out at you in the frequent mention of a group: those whom the Father has given the Son. Just before His death, John 17 records Jesus praying to the Father for this group of people. Jesus makes it clear that His prayer is not for everyone, but a specific (verse 9). He says they were given to Him by the Father (verse 6), they know the truth about Him and believe in Him (verse 8), and He shares them with the Father (verse 10). He prays that the Father would keep them, and that they would be united as He and the Father are united (verse 11), and that He would sanctify them in His truth (verse 17). Jesus sanctifies Himself for these people (verse 19). And lest we think Jesus is only speaking of His disciples at that time, He makes it clear that He is speaking of all who would come to believe in Him (verse 20). That glorious chapter points back to something that happened before the Incarnation, before creation itself. Peter tells us that the Lamb was “foreknown [13] before the foundation of the world”. Furthermore, in the book of Revelation, several mentions are made to the Lamb’s Book of Life. Those who have their name in the Book “will be dressed in white”, and confessed by the Son to the Father (3:5), and they alone will be allowed to enter New Jerusalem (21:27). Conversely, those who do not have their name written in the Book will worship the Beast (13:8) and be thrown into the Lake of Fire (20:15). In verse 13:8, we are told when names are put in this book: before the foundation of the world. This book contains the names of those the Father has given the Son; His bride, His sheep, His elect. This is confirmed in Ephesians 1, were Paul says the Father “chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will” (Ephesians 1:3-5). Because this covenant happened outside of, nothing in time can thwart it. As Jesus said, “All that the Father gives to Me WILL come to Me, and whoever comes to Me I will NEVER cast out” (John 6:37). And later He says, “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand” (John 10:28). This is why Paul can boldly declare “Those whom He foreknew, He predestined… Those whom He predestined, He called… those whom He called, He justified… those whom He justified, He glorified” (Romans 8:29-30). Nothing in time can bring a charge against the elect of God (Romans 8:31-39). Jesus came to do the will of His Father (John 6:38-39), and His will is that He save His people from perishing. This fact is reflected in His very name. As the angel told Joseph, “you shall call His name Jesus, for He WILL save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FOOTNOTES 1. God responds to Moses’ question of His name with “אהיה” (I am). In addition to this, the name that is attributed to God most often throughout the Old Testament, יהוה (Yahweh, translated as “the LORD”) comes from the same word family, and is the noun form of the verb היה, which means: “to be, to have being”. There is much discussion about what this means, but the most reasonable theory seems to be that God’s self-existent and eternal nature is in mind. God has always been, and has the very substance of BEING in Himself. All existence comes from Him. As R.C. Sproul points out in humorous fashion, God is the only legitimate “being”, because human “beings”, are in a state of change, and therefore more accurately described as “human becomings”. God on the other hand, doesn’t change; always “being” what He is (Psalm 102:26-27, James 1:17). 2. Both John 8:58 and the verse from Revelation can actually be tied back to Exodus 3:14. In the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), the Hebrew phrase “אהיה אשר אהיה” (I am who I am) is translated into the Greek “εγω ειμι ο ων” (I am who is). To say “the one who is” is as awkward in Greek grammar as it is in English, and it is suspected that John used the awkward phraseology so that readers familiar with the LXX, would recall Exodus 3:14. 3. Translation of this verse is a source of controversy. First is how the Greek text should read. Some manuscripts read “μονογενης θεος”, and others “μονογενης υιος” (one and only son). The manuscript evidence favors the first reading. I’ve read most of the early manuscripts of John 1, and I didn’t find the reading of υιος until Codex Alexandrinus, which is dated 400 A.D. All of the manuscripts dated earlier unanimously have the reading of θεος. The other bit of controversy centers on how the word μονογενης should be translated into English. Early English translations, and most notably the King James version, translated the word “only-begotten”. This translation is mistaken because of a false understanding of the suffix “-γενης”. It was assumed that this came from the γενναω family of words, which mean to “beget/bring forth”. In reality, the suffix comes from the word family of γενος, which means a “kind/type”. Combined with the prefix of “μονο-” (mono/only), the most literal meaning of the word is “one of a kind”, which means John 1:18 calls Jesus “one of a kind God”. This translation is affirmed Hebrews 11:17 where Isaac is called the “μονογενη” of Abraham. The word cannot mean “only-begotten”, because Abraham had already begotten Ishmael before Isaac was born. Rather, Isaac is view as the “one of a kind (unique)” son because he was the son to whom God’s promise was applied. Texts that describe Jesus as “begotten (γενναω)” are usually in the context of His birth into this world (Matthew 2:1, Luke 1:35, John 18:37). The Son of God is not begotten ontologically, but the man Christ Jesus was begotten according the flesh (Romans 1:3). The one exception is references to Psalm 2: “You are my Son; today I have begotten You.”, which are likely referring to Christ’s resurrection and ascension to the right hand and throne of God, as Paul suggests in Acts 13:30-37. Here, γεγννηκα is likely saying that Jesus is “brought forth” (resurrected) after His earthly mission was completed. Note that it does not say “This day I have begotten You as my Son.” Jesus was always the Son. 4. This clarification is made to reject Modalism (also known as Sebaleanism), which asserts that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are merely different manifestations of the one God. This is in clear contradiction with both the fact that the Father and Son have had an eternal relationship (John 1:1, 1:18, 17:5), and that there are times where more than one Person of the Godhead is either present simultaneously (Matthew 3:16-17, Mark 9:7, John 12:28; 17:1-26, Acts 7:55, Revelation 5:13; 21:22-23) or mentioned together in a distinct fashion (Matthew 28:19, 1 Corinthians 8:6; 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14, Galatians 1:1, 2 John 1:9, Jude 1:25, etc.) 5. Though the paradox “time before time” is not something we can understand or prove, this does not negate its truth. Mathematician Kurt Gödel developed his Incompleteness Theorems, which demonstrate that there are more things true than are provable. It is impossible to know everything about a system from inside that system. One way of imagining this is a building: While inside of a building, you can explain a lot about the building, and may be able to theorize what the outside of the building is like, but as long as you are restricted to the building, you cannot explain the building in its entirety. Likewise, our restriction to the space-time system prevents us from being able to explain what is beyond space and time, though something with ontology beyond space and time is required to explain the existence of this system (see cosmological arguments on causality). 6. Author’s translation. This is the most literal rendering of the phrase “ουδε εν”, and erases any possibility of someone inserting, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses do in their New World “Translation” (I use that word loosely here…), that Jesus was the means by which all OTHER things were created, but with Him still being a creation. The strong wording of John 1:3 simply will not allow this. 7. Just as the Father being called “the only true God” (John 17:3) does not negate the fact that Jesus is the “only/unique God” (John 1:18), 1 Corinthians 8:6 does not disprove the deity of Christ. If the Father being called the “one God” here disqualifies Christ as God, then His being called the “one Lord” disqualifies the Father as Lord. Given that the Father is sovereign over all things (1 Corinthians 15:27), it is absurd to deny that He is Lord. On top of this, “Lord” (κυριος) is the Greek word that is used to translate the Hebrew יהוה, Yahweh, the name of God. The Jews maintained such a reverence for God’s name that they would be hesitant to even utter it, much less attempt translate it into a Gentile language (There are rare Septuagint manuscripts the keep יהוה in Hebrew letters, as well as occasional writings where they attempted to transliterate the word into Greek letter, but those are but a small minority). Even today, most Jews will refuse to pronounce יהוה, preferring to substitute with אדני (adonai, the Hebrew word for lord) or השם (hashem, meaning “the name”). Paul is likely appealing the verses like Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 45:5, Psalm 18:31, and others, in which the Septuagint translation would use the same words “κυριος/lord” and “θεος/god” as 1 Corinthians 8:6. (Notice that in this formula, it is Jesus who is given the title translated by Yahweh.) 8. Since the focus of this essay is the dual nature of the person of Christ, I avoided digressing into an exhaustive Biblical case for Trinitarian creation, particularly with regards to the Holy Spirit. Though His role in creation isn’t given an extensive doctrinal treatment in Scripture, there are enough references to show that He was involved, and had a particular role as well. See Psalm 33:6 (“breath” is the same as “spirit” in Hebrew and Greek; רוח, πνευμα), Genesis 1:2, Job 26:13, 33:4, Psalm 104:30. 9. I am aware that the word for “word” in these verses from Hebrews is ρημα, and not λογος, the word for “word” in John 1. However, these words are lexical synonyms, and are both used to translate the Hebrew word דבר, which this is essay goes on to show is often used of Christ. In the same way, Christ is frequently called “κυριος” (Lord), but there are references to Him as “δεσποτης”, which is typically translated as “Sovereign Lord” or “Master” (see Jude 1:4). The words are interchangeable, and share many of the same nuances (for example, both are used for owners of slaves; Ephesians 6:5, Titus 2:9), and we should not assume that they can’t convey the same idea. So it is with ρημα and λογος. Despite the slight difference, I think the context of Hebrews 1:2-3 and 11:3 are clearly pointing to Jesus as the Word of God. 10. What about passages that describe Christ as the “firstborn”? This objection comes from two common misunderstandings. The first misunderstanding is contextual. Most of the verses that describe Him as “firstborn” are in the context of His resurrection; the firstborn of the dead, the firstborn of the new creation God is ushering in (Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:18, Revelation 1:5). But there are verses that seem to speak of Christ as firstborn that are not related to the resurrection (such as Colossians 1:15), and one could even argue that Christ isn’t the first to rise from the dead (which ignores that His glorified resurrection is different, because the others died twice). These objections to these verses come from a misunderstanding of the Greek word “πρωτοτοκος”. In the ancient world, and still common today, was the custom that the firstborn son would be the one to inherit what belongs to his parents. Because of this, the word was associated with the idea of an inheritor, the one who is preeminent and did not have to mean a literal “firstborn”. One example of this is Jacob and Esau. Esau was born before Jacob, but in the Septuagint translation of Genesis 25:33, Esau sells his “birthright” (πρωτοτοκια) to Jacob. Likewise, though Israel was not the first nation God made, God calls them His πρωτοτοκος (Exodus 4:22, Jeremiah 31:9). This is why Psalm 89:27 says of Christ “I will make Him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of earth.” When Christ is called the πρωτοτοκος, He is being called preeminent. 11. A more ambiguous verse for this discussion is Jude 1:5. There, we have two possible readings, with either “the Lord” or “Jesus” preceding these words: “who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.” This is a more difficult textual variant (in most cases it’s fairly clear which reading is likely to be original). For many years, “the Lord” was the preferred reading, though in recent years, “Jesus” has seemed to be preferred by textual critics. The ESV translated the verse with “Jesus”, and the Nestle-Aland 28th Edition has the primary reading of “Ιησους” (Jesus), as well. Regardless of what the original reading was, however, I think the content is the same. Though the term “Lord” is occasionally applied to the Father (Matthew 11:25) and the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17), it is Jesus who is most closely associated with the title in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 8:6, Philippians 2:11, Acts 2:36, Matthew 7:21, etc.) On top of this, Jude himself explicitly calls Jesus “Lord” several times in his short epistle, one of them right before the verse in question: Jude 4, 17, 21, 25. 12. I reject the Unitarian assertion that John 12:41 is referring to Isaiah’s visions of the coming Messiah in general. They will assert that the quotation from Isaiah 53 in John 12:38 suggests that John is saying Isaiah saw the glory of the Messiah as the suffering servant. But given that John uses the phrase “saw His glory” in the same context as an Isaiah 6 quotation, a chapter which was no doubt well-known to Jewish believers, and that verse 42 still seems to be flowing from verse 40, I see no reason to conclude that John is referring to anything but the glorious vision Isaiah had of the LORD in the temple. 13. The verb “foreknow” (προγινωσκω) is not limited to simply “having knowledge beforehand”. To suggest this would cause great confusion with certain passages (1 Peter 1:20 meaning God simply “knew about” Christ before the foundation of the world/Romans 8:29-30 meaning that all people will be glorified, since God knew about all before creation.) On top of this, it takes away from a rich truth of the Bible: God “knowing” His people is not limited to time. When God says to Israel, “you only have I known of all the families of the earth” (Amos 3:2), He is not suggesting that He has no knowledge of other people. Nor should we think that when we read “Adam knew his wife Eve, and she conceived” suggests that reproduction is caused by introducing yourself to a person. The Bible uses the word “know” (ידע, γινωσκω) often to refer to an intimate relationship. In these contexts, we could even read the word as “love”. The Lord loved Israel in a way different than other nations. Adam loved Eve, and she conceived. So when we read about Christ and the elect being “foreknown”, it suggests that God set His love upon them before the world was made.
Posted on: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 22:55:07 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015